But they fell into the exact trap I’m describing here. If you need a research paper to tell you that someone stuck in a cage devoid of any comforts will be more prone to drug addiction than someone stuck in a near-idyllic society, then you are beyond help. Useful knowledge does not need Sciencism. The explanatory power of Rat Park is not because of some science labels that were slapped on it, it’s how the story helps unlock your intuition about behavior change.
Note: You don’t need an experiment to prove a lot of what you know intuitively from your experience
That’s interesting because we already know the truth, but we’re so insecure and we need data to verify it
That reminds me of Why philosophy is better than science
It’s similar because we’ve always experienced biases. Those of us who are thinkers. This is the scientists’ world and we are living in it.
It’s different because there should be some kind of harmony or marriage between the 2 i would say. We need to balance it
It’s important because we have to be able to integrate all sources of knowledge if we are going to develop well
Read more at: Philosophy, Not Science - by Nat Eliason - Infinite Play
You may also be interested in: Data has killed our intuition